前不久翻Rockbox论坛，有一个坛友无意提到了他在Rockbox里面使用MPC格式能节省电。今天好奇我做了一个测试：

将无损Ludovico Einaudi.-.Doctor Zhivago.01.Zhivago分别转换为MP3和MPC格式，MP3使用LAME --vbr v2 -new，平均码率192Kbps；MPC用Q5，平均码率170Kbps。在Sansa e260 Rockbox firmware，Debug Buffering Thread中测试，每次待闪存读取结束时进入Debug Buffering Thread，稳定过后记录CPU frequency，惊人的结果是MP3 50MHz avg.,MPC 33MHz avg.(Rockbox我增加了Bass和Tremble，未开EQ，使用自制WPS)，根据Rockbox普遍经验，1MHz=1mA电流，也就是说播放MP3，Sansa e260+Rockbox=750mAH/50mAH=15H，而播放MPC此数据是750mAH/33MHz=22.7H，(22.7H-15H)/15H=51%。51%的播放时长增幅，太诱惑了！

在foobar2000播放两种格式时，Q5MPC码率没V2 MP3 VBR new高，但是频谱曲线比后者平滑的多，真是令人惊艳！

以后就用MPC了。

顺命时不可忘归真返本
欢乐中应该想无常即到
认主独一

有缘相聚，又何必常想起。
到无缘时分离，又何必常相依。

我心里有的只是一个你，你心里没有我，又何必在一起。
今天说了要忘了你，明天却又想起你。
念你念你在梦里，问此情何时尽？

A complete net application accomplished in 2 days from scratch,I fule myself.

http://www.fs2you.com/files/8ce2fa8a-cc01-...1-00142218fc6e/

Bill Conti - The Big Blue

www.musicool.cn

Alexandros Nikolaidis 亚历山大·尼古拉泽斯 中文翻译不知道谁起的，太烂了，从中文根本就猜不出英文，或许是希腊文？

http://paulstead.com/scrob/

To a lovely young boy!

leffe @ HQShare 给出了一个相当舒服的解释：

The reason is quite simple actually and has to do more with economics than with engineering or technical matters.

Inside each computer optical drive, be it a CD reader or writer, DVD reader or writer, you have several microcontrollers (or even microprocessors lately). According to which ones you have in there your drive will be able to have more or less features. All very logical so far. But now a thing called economy of scale comes into the equation. It's a lot cheaper for a chip manufacturer to produce 1 million units of their top microcontroller (with all features) than to make 200.000 units of 5 different models. This way you have only one manufacturing line setup with each robot doing the same thing in every chip. You save in programming time, production line organization, time coincidence and logistics, that you'd have to multiply by 5 (or at least coordinate them) if you were making 5 different models. If you are going to make one, you do the most complete one, of course, then each costumer uses only the parts/features they want.

So, practically everybody ends up having a top microcontroller (several actually) inside their drive, be it a cheap or expensive drive.

Now, the problem is, that the optical and mechanical parts (called the transport) are not like that. And, if you want something good, you (the manufacturer) will have to pay for it. And probably will pass that price increase onto its costumers, of course. And those good opticals, together with some quality control chip, will, in fact be able to read and detect C2 errors, and use that information for calculating the real content on the fly. Not many drives are actually capable of doing it, when you consider the number of drives on the market. Few of them have actual C2 error detection implemented, because not all of their components are capable of it.

But the biggest problem comes now, when you join the previous 2 paragraphs. So, you have a drive that cannot actually detect C2 errors, but with some top microcontrollers inside. So, when EAC (or other software) asks the drive "Are you capable of C2 error detection?", the drive's microcontroller will answer "Of course I know what C2 errors are and I can correct them, I'm a f***ing top microcontroller, you know?". Problem is, he'll never get them to be corrected from the transport part, because it's not implemented in the drive, and so, he'll never correct any. However, EAC will tell you you have a C2 error detecting compliant drive, because the drive has just confirmed that.

Some brands (like Plextor, for instance) usually implement C2 capability, but most of them don't, or at least not in the majority of models.

$if2(%album artist%,%artist%) $if2(%date%,) - %album%.$if2(%discnumber%.,)$if2(%tracknumber%.,)%title%

兼顾专辑艺术家，碟序号和曲序号的有无， 。